Tweet
Unsafe working conditions - protection for a mistaken employee
Hi
I believe it is well established (e.g. under Section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996) that employees cannot suffer a detriment if, for example, they refuse to attend an unsafe place of work, or report health & safety concerns.
Similarly, I understand that if an employee were to be dismissed in these circumstances, they would have a case for "Automatic Unfair Dismissal".
My question please is whether these rights still apply if an employee acts following a mistaken belief that the place of work was unsafe.
Example: Tim works in an office and the building is currently being refurbished. Tim genuinely fears that the old walls & ceiling tiles that are being stripped out may contain asbestos. Tim raises the concern with his employer, who reassures him that the materials do not contain asbestos, and produces an official asbestos survey to "prove" this. Tim is not satisfied with the survey, as the survey appears not to have sampled the materials in question. Tim explains to his employer that he is not convinced, genuinely fears for his safety, and leaves the premises. Later, in an HSE investigation, the materials are confirmed not to have contained asbestos.
So, Tim's concern was genuinely held, albeit mistaken. Is Tim still "protected"?
I believe it is well established (e.g. under Section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996) that employees cannot suffer a detriment if, for example, they refuse to attend an unsafe place of work, or report health & safety concerns.
Similarly, I understand that if an employee were to be dismissed in these circumstances, they would have a case for "Automatic Unfair Dismissal".
My question please is whether these rights still apply if an employee acts following a mistaken belief that the place of work was unsafe.
Example: Tim works in an office and the building is currently being refurbished. Tim genuinely fears that the old walls & ceiling tiles that are being stripped out may contain asbestos. Tim raises the concern with his employer, who reassures him that the materials do not contain asbestos, and produces an official asbestos survey to "prove" this. Tim is not satisfied with the survey, as the survey appears not to have sampled the materials in question. Tim explains to his employer that he is not convinced, genuinely fears for his safety, and leaves the premises. Later, in an HSE investigation, the materials are confirmed not to have contained asbestos.
So, Tim's concern was genuinely held, albeit mistaken. Is Tim still "protected"?
Comment